I may have found the lunar return that shows me that natal planet angularity in SLRs is per se important.

I have a friend, Mike. (Not the Mike who posted above.) He's a sweet double Sagittarius with Moon in Midheaven (albeit square Pluto) but, off in the middleground, he has a < 3° Mars-Saturn opposition:

19°04' Libra - Mars
21°45' Aries - Saturn

He's always had struggle, but not so much as when he moved far, far from home to be with the woman he adored more than any other and, in time, to create and begin raising two sons. He did this in one of the worse places in the world for his happiness, a place where his local Ascendant is 19°02' Cancer. They have struggled with survival in many ways.

It had been clear lately that Mike had something weighing very heavily on him, something that was breaking his heart. Tonight, he let us all in (using a fairly public place for it, so I feel OK about telling his story here) on what was breaking his heart so: His wife had been distant for a while, they'd been struggling with survival and other things, and this week she told him she no longer loved him and nothing was going to change that.

His Lunar Return was April 23. On its own, it only says a little, though what's it says is quite symbolically apt: Sun is 2°43' below Descendant (of all angles!) in partile mundane conjunction with Uranus.

Ah, but then there is this: SLR Midheaven is 20°21' Cancer. Compare this to the natal Mars-Saturn positions above. (The Mars/Saturn midpoint is 20°25' Cancer.) Natal Mars-Saturn receives no transits. Its only importance in the SLR is its exact angularity, within bare minutes. - The SLR itself shows the event of a marital breach with Sun-Uranus conjoined on its Descendant, but only the natal planet' exact angularity shows the pain.

Excellent example of the importance of natal planets with the angles of a SLR.

Yes, this one chart might give the answer to the question Ive been asking in this thread, since there is no other way that the Mars-Saturn is active in this SLR itself. For example, it's not aspected by any transiting planets.

The transiting planets show the event itself well enough - Sun-Uranus conjoined on Dsc for decision about divorce - but the precision of the natal "pain" aspect seems quite important.

I've been wondering lately if the natal aspects show the "hidden" or "inner" things going on in lunar returns such as this - sort of like how Jim theorized elsewhere that the IC, as an angle in natal charts, wasn't inherently weaker so much as it was just "private" and therefore less obvious from the outside.

While I might want to keep the questions raised in this thread live and simmering for a while - remain in a state of inquiry - I'm settling back toward the theory of the last several decades that angular natal planets per se are live interpretive factors. As people come up with distinctive examples, this thread would still be a suitable repository.

A simple example, though, involves Marion's and my SLRs and Demis for the approach to the wedding. Published statistics by Garth Allen in the early '50s showed a very strong tendency of natal and transiting Jupiter to be angular in lunar returns for weddings, Here is a multi-part example of that in practice.

My current Demi-SLR (5/13), which will be technically in force when the wedding occurs, has natal Jupiter at 3°37' Cancer square SLR MC at 1°48' Libra. (There are other factors stronger: transiting Pluto, natal Neptune, etc., and many other details; but this is also a factor.) For the wedding location, this is much closer: MC 3°09' Libra.

My next SLR (5/27), which will occur 2 hours 20 minutes after the wedding climaxes, will already be felt for about a day before that. Though Mercury setting is the most angular factor, transiting Jupiter 26°09' is not only in near-partile square to natal Moon but also is rising. (Jupiter is 6°09' before Ascendant. Moon is 4°36' past IC. They average 0°46' from the angle.)

Marion's new SLR (5/13) has natal Jupiter rising. For our home, where the SLR occurred, natal Jupiter is 2°56' below Asc and natal Pluto 3°42' below Dsc (averaging 0°23' from the horizon). For the wedding city, natal Jupiter is closer (1°54' below Asc) and Pluto farther (5°17' below Dsc). These BTW are almost the only active factors in her SLR at all.

Marion's next Demi-SLR (5/26) occurs 20 hours before the wedding. For the location, transiting Jupiter is 5°33' above Asc but natal Jupiter is closer, falling 1°02' from SLR IC. These are basically the only factors active in the Demi-SLR.

Did you reach any kind of conclusion whether the natal angles/chart against angles actually are to be considered or not?

Yes. This whole topic was a wrong avenue - they're just as important as have been historically thought. I came across enough examples that were decisive that I couldn't ignore them.

Some of the clearest and simplest were Marion's and my SLRs and Demis around the wedding. In simple terms, the statistics compiled and published almost 70 years ago showed natal and transiting Jupiter foreground for weddings. IIRC (the data is above), every lunar and demi for both of us had Jupiter right on an angle, some of which were natal Jupiters only.

With the other examples that had dribbled in, and the limited statistics we have on the matter, the data seems to be saying that yes, natal planet angularity works on the same basis as transiting planet angularity.